agentsclimarketplace

Review rebuttal helper

Skill StaryMoon/ai-researcher-skills/skills/review-rebuttal-helper

Practical skill pack for AI research agents: paper briefing, experiment planning, rebuttal drafting, radar maintenance, and GitHub upkeep.

Install
npx -y skills add StaryMoon/ai-researcher-skills --skill review-rebuttal-helper

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

1.5 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Review Rebuttal Helper

Purpose

Convert reviewer comments into a clear response plan and concise rebuttal text. The skill is designed for papers, camera-ready changes, artifact reviews, and code-release feedback.

When To Use

Use this skill when the user provides reviews, editor queries, issue comments, PR feedback, or reviewer objections and wants a response.

Inputs

  • Reviewer comments or GitHub feedback.
  • Paper section, experiment log, or code diff if available.
  • Constraints such as word limit, tone, venue, or deadline.

Workflow

  1. Split comments into atomic claims or requests.
  2. Classify each item: misunderstanding, missing experiment, writing issue, valid limitation, citation request, formatting request, or factual error.
  3. For each item, identify available evidence and missing evidence.
  4. Draft a response strategy: concede, clarify, add experiment, add citation, or correct.
  5. Write concise response text that is polite but specific.
  6. Add a camera-ready action list or code action list.
  7. If evidence is missing, do not bluff. Mark the answer as pending and propose the quickest evidence collection step.

Output

  • Reviewer Map
  • Response Strategy
  • Draft Rebuttal
  • Revision Checklist
  • Evidence Still Needed

Quality Gates

  • Do not attack the reviewer.
  • Do not promise experiments that cannot be run.
  • Keep factual corrections grounded in paper text or local evidence.
  • Make every promised change traceable to a section, table, figure, or file.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.